Cortical Representation of Lateralized Grasping in Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): A Combined MRI and PET Study

Functional imaging studies in humans have localized the motor-hand region to a neuroanatomical landmark call the KNOB within the precentral gyrus. It has also been reported that the KNOB is larger in the hemisphere contralateral to an individual's preferred hand, and therefore may represent the neural substrate for handedness. The KNOB has also been neuronatomically described in chimpanzees and other great apes and is similarly associated with handedness. However, whether the chimpanzee KNOB represents the hand region is unclear from the extant literature. Here, we used PET to quantify neural metabolic activity in chimpanzees when engaged in unilateral reach-and-grasping responses and found significantly lateralized activation of the KNOB region in the hemisphere contralateral to the hand used by the chimpanzees. We subsequently constructed a probabilistic map of the KNOB region in chimpanzees in order to assess the overlap in consistency in the anatomical landmarks of the KNOB with the functional maps generated from the PET analysis. We found significant overlap in the anatomical and functional voxels comprising the KNOB region, suggesting that the KNOB does correspond to the hand region in chimpanzees. Lastly, from the probabilistic maps, we compared right- and left-handed chimpanzees on lateralization in grey and white matter within the KNOB region and found that asymmetries in white matter of the KNOB region were larger in the hemisphere contralateral to the preferred hand. These results suggest that neuroanatomical asymmetries in the KNOB likely reflect changes in connectivity in primary motor cortex that are experience dependent in chimpanzees and possibly humans

Computed tomography angiography versus Agatston score for diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with stable chest pain: individual patient data meta-analysis of the international COME-CCT Consortium

Objectives: There is conflicting evidence about the comparative diagnostic accuracy of the Agatston score versus computed tomography angiography (CTA) in patients with suspected obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD).Purpose: To determine whether CTA is superior to the Agatston score in the diagnosis of CAD.Methods: In total 2452 patients with stable chest pain and a clinical indication for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) for suspected CAD were included by the Collaborative Meta-analysis of Cardiac CT (COME-CCT) Consortium. An Agatston score of > 400 was considered positive, and obstructive CAD defined as at least 50% coronary diameter stenosis on ICA was used as the reference standard.Results: Obstructive CAD was diagnosed in 44.9% of patients (1100/2452). The median Agatston score was 74. Diagnostic accuracy of CTA for the detection of obstructive CAD (81.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.5 to 84.1%) was significantly higher than that of the Agatston score (68.8%, 95% CI: 64.2 to 73.1%, p 1000).Conclusions: Results in our international cohort show CTA to have significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than the Agatston score in patients with stable chest pain, suspected CAD, and a clinical indication for ICA. Diagnostic performance of CTA is not affected by a higher Agatston score while an Agatston score of zero does not reliably exclude obstructive CAD.Key points: • CTA showed significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (81.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.5 to 84.1%) for diagnosis of coronary artery disease when compared to the Agatston score (68.8%, 95% CI: 64.2 to 73.1%, p 1000). • Seventeen percent of patients with an Agatston score of zero showed obstructive coronary artery disease by invasive angiography showing absence of coronary artery calcium cannot reliably exclude coronary artery disease.</p

Diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease using computed tomography angiography in patients with stable chest pain depending on clinical probability and in clinically important subgroups: meta-analysis of individual patient data

OBJECTIVETo determine whether coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) should be performed in patients with any clinical probability of coronary artery disease (CAD), and whether the diagnostic performance differs between subgroups of patients.DESIGNProspectively designed meta-analysis of individual patient data from prospective diagnostic accuracy studies.DATA SOURCESMedline, Embase, and Web of Science for published studies. Unpublished studies were identified via direct contact with participating investigators.ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIESProspective diagnostic accuracy studies that compared coronary CTA with coronary angiography as the reference standard, using at least a 50% diameter reduction as a cutoff value for obstructive CAD. All patients needed to have a clinical indication for coronary angiography due to suspected CAD, and both tests had to be performed in all patients. Results had to be provided using 2x2 or 3x2 cross tabulations for the comparison of CTA with coronary angiography. Primary outcomes were the positive and negative predictive values of CTA as a function of clinical pretest probability of obstructive CAD, analysed by a generalised linear mixed model; calculations were performed including and excluding non-diagnostic CTA results. The no-treat/treat threshold model was used to determine the range of appropriate pretest probabilities for CTA. The threshold model was based on obtained post-test probabilities of less than 15% in case of negative CTA and above 50% in case of positive CTA. Sex, angina pectoris type, age, and number of computed tomography detector rows were used as clinical variables to analyse the diagnostic performance in relevant subgroups.RESULTSIndividual patient data from 5332 patients from 65 prospective diagnostic accuracy studies were retrieved. For a pretest probability range of 7-67%, the treat threshold of more than 50% and the no-treat threshold of less than 15% post-test probability were obtained using CTA. At a pretest probability of 7%, the positive predictive value of CTA was 50.9% (95% confidence interval 43.3% to 57.7%) and the negative predictive value of CTA was 97.8% (96.4% to 98.7%); corresponding values at a pretest probability of 67% were 82.7% (78.3% to 86.2%) and 85.0% (80.2% to 88.9%), respectively. The overall sensitivity of CTA was 95.2% (92.6% to 96.9%) and the specificity was 79.2% (74.9% to 82.9%). CTA using more than 64 detector rows was associated with a higher empirical sensitivity than CTA using up to 64 rows (93.4% v 86.5%, P=0.002) and specificity (84.4% v 72.6%, P<0.001). The area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for CTA was 0.897 (0.889 to 0.906), and the diagnostic performance of CTA was slightly lower in women than in with men (area under the curve 0.874 (0.858 to 0.890) v 0.907 (0.897 to 0.916), P<0.001). The diagnostic performance of CTA was slightly lower in patients older than 75 (0.864 (0.834 to 0.894), P=0.018 v all other age groups) and was not significantly influenced by angina pectoris type (typical angina 0.895 (0.873 to 0.917), atypical angina 0.898 (0.884 to 0.913), non-anginal chest pain 0.884 (0.870 to 0.899), other chest discomfort 0.915 (0.897 to 0.934)).CONCLUSIONSIn a no-treat/treat threshold model, the diagnosis of obstructive CAD using coronary CTA in patients with stable chest pain was most accurate when the clinical pretest probability was between 7% and 67%. Performance of CTA was not influenced by the angina pectoris type and was slightly higher in men and lower in older patients

Metallic artefact reduction with monoenergetic dual-energy CT: systematic ex vivo evaluation of posterior spinal fusion implants from various vendors and different spine levels

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate optimal monoenergetic dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) settings for artefact reduction of posterior spinal fusion implants of various vendors and spine levels. METHODS: Posterior spinal fusion implants of five vendors for cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine were examined ex vivo with single-energy (SE) CT (120 kVp) and DECT (140/100 kVp). Extrapolated monoenergetic DECT images at 64, 69, 88, 105 keV and individually adjusted monoenergy for optimised image quality (OPTkeV) were generated. Two independent radiologists assessed quantitative and qualitative image parameters for each device and spine level. RESULTS: Inter-reader agreements of quantitative and qualitative parameters were high (ICC = 0.81-1.00, κ = 0.54-0.77). HU values of spinal fusion implants were significantly different among vendors (P < 0.001), spine levels (P < 0.01) and among SECT, monoenergetic DECT of 64, 69, 88, 105 keV and OPTkeV (P < 0.01). Image quality was significantly (P < 0.001) different between datasets and improved with higher monoenergies of DECT compared with SECT (V = 0.58, P < 0.001). Artefacts decreased significantly (V = 0.51, P < 0.001) at higher monoenergies. OPTkeV values ranged from 123-141 keV. OPTkeV according to vendor and spine level are presented herein. CONCLUSIONS: Monoenergetic DECT provides significantly better image quality and less metallic artefacts from implants than SECT. Use of individual keV values for vendor and spine level is recommended. KEY POINTS: • Artefacts pose problems for CT following posterior spinal fusion implants. • CT images are interpreted better with monoenergetic extrapolation using dual-energy (DE) CT. • DECT extrapolation improves image quality and reduces metallic artefacts over SECT. • There were considerable differences in monoenergy values among vendors and spine levels. • Use of individualised monoenergy values is indicated for different metallic hardware devices